Freedom to Thrive: Reimagining Safety & Security in Our Communities CONTENTS
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FREEDOM TO THRIVE REIMAGINING SAFETY & SECURITY IN OUR COMMUNITIES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS About the Authors The Center for Popular Democracy (CPD) is a national network of 48 grassroots organizations in 32 states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico. CPD works to create equity, opportunity, and a dynamic democracy in partnership with high-impact base-building organizations, organizing alliances, and progressive unions. CPD strengthens our collective capacity to envision and win an innovative pro-worker, pro-immigrant, racial and economic justice agenda. CPD’s Racial Justice Campaign works in collaboration and solidarity with our partners and allies across the country for an end to discriminatory and oppressive policies which marginalize Black people and other communities of color. Law for Black Lives is a network of over 3,000 radical lawyers, law students, and legal workers committed to helping build the power of Black communities and organizers. Formed out of the uprisings in Ferguson and Baltimore, Law for Black Lives works with individuals and organizations across the country to embolden, defend and protect the ongoing movement for Black liberation. Black Youth Project 100 (BYP100) is an activist member- based organization of Black 18–35 year old abolitionist freedom fighters moving toward liberation using a Black Queer Feminist lens. BYP100 is building a network focused on transformative leadership development; grassroots, direct action, and digital organizing; policy advocacy; and political education. BYP100 envisions a world where all Black people have economic, social, political, and educational freedom. This report was written by Kate Hamaji and Kumar Rao of the Center for Popular Democracy, Marbre Stahly-Butts of Law for Black Lives, and Janaé Bonsu, Charlene Carruthers, Roselyn Berry, and Denzel McCampbell of BYP100, in collaboration with 27 local organizations around the country. Special thanks to Maggie Corser, Michele Kilpatrick, and Patrick Stegemoeller for research support, and Jennifer Epps-Addison, Andrew Friedman, and Tracey Corder for their invaluable edits. The report was designed by John Emerson and SooYoung VanDeMark. i Finally, we would also like to thank and acknowledge the significant input and critical work of the following organizations: Action Now (Illinois) Mijente actionnow.org mijente.net Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment acceaction.org organizemo.org ArchCity Defenders (Missouri) Neighborhoods Organizing for Change (Minnesota) archcitydefenders.org mnnoc.org #ATLisReady (Georgia) New Florida Majority atlisready.black newfloridamajority.org/wp Black Alliance for Just Immigration (New York) New Georgia Project blackalliance.org newgeorgiaproject.org BYP100 New York Communities for Change byp100.org nycommunities.org Californians for Safety and Justice Organize Florida safeandjust.org orgfl.org CASA (Maryland) Organized Communities Against Deportations (Illinois) wearecasa.org organizedcommunities.org Community United for Police Reform (New York) Prison & Family Justice Project (Michigan) changethenypd.org law.umich.edu/centersandprograms/pcl/Pages/pfjp.aspx Dignity & Power Now (California) SNaP Coalition (Georgia) dignityandpowernow.org rjactioncenter.org/snap Ella Baker Center (California) Take Action Minnesota ellabakercenter.org takeactionminnesota.org Good Jobs Detroit (Michigan) VOCAL-NY goodjobsnow.org vocal-ny.org Make the Road New York Youth Justice Coalition (California) maketheroadny.org youth4justice.org Maryland Communities United communitiesunite.org ii Freedom to Thrive: Reimagining Safety & Security in Our Communities CONTENTS Acknowledgements i Executive Summary 1 Introduction 3 Budget Analysis 101 5 Budget Profiles 7 Atlanta 8 Baltimore 13 Chicago 19 Contra Costa County 25 Detroit 31 Houston 37 Los Angeles 43 Minneapolis 49 New York City 55 Oakland 61 Orlando 67 St. Louis County 71 A Call to Action from the People: 79 Participatory Budgeting: A Model for Community Control over Money Conclusion 81 Citations 82 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Over the last 30 years, at both the national and from police and prisons towards communities local levels, governments have dramatically and their development. We call this the invest/ increased their spending on criminalization, divest framework. We also offer a “Budget 101” policing, and mass incarceration while to help readers understand some of the terms drastically cutting investments in basic reflected in this report, and provide a general infrastructure and slowing investment in framework of budget analysis and advocacy. social safety net programs.1 At the end of the report we highlight the The choice to resource punitive systems instead potential impact of participatory budgeting, a of stabilizing and nourishing ones does not popular financial governance strategy which make communities safer. Instead, study can assist advocates and communities in after study shows that a living wage, access advancing the invest/divest framework. to holistic health services and treatment, educational opportunity, and stable housing Key Findings are far more successful in reducing crime than police or prisons.2 • Among the jurisdictions profiled, police spending vastly outpaces expenditures in This report examines racial disparities, vital community resources and services, policing landscapes, and budgets in twelve with the highest percentage being 41.2 jurisdictions across the country, comparing percent of general fund expenditures in the city and county spending priorities with Oakland. those of community organizations and their members. While many community members, • Among cities profiled, per capita police supported by research and established best spending ranges from $381 to as high as practices, assert that increased spending on $772. police do not make them safer, cities and counties continue to rely overwhelmingly on • Consistent community safety priorities policing and incarceration spending while emerged across jurisdictions. Most notable under-resourcing less damaging, more fair, among them are demands for mental and more effective safety initiatives. Each health services, youth programming, and profile also highlights current or prospective infrastructure such as transit access and campaigns that seek to divest resources away housing. 1 Freedom to Thrive: Reimagining Safety & Security in Our Communities Total Police Spending Per Capita Police Spending (Total % of General Fund Expenditures City (Total Budget) Budget) on Police Department Atlanta $218,300,000 $486 29.7% Baltimore $480,700,000 $772 25.6% Chicago $1,460,000,000 $537 38.6% Detroit $310,200,000 $450 30.0% Houston $850,400,000 $383 35.0% Los Angeles $1,485,600,000 $381 25.7% Minneapolis $163,200,000 $408 35.8% New York City $4,891,900,000 $581 8.2% Oakland $242,500,000 $594 41.2% Orlando $153,800,000 $599 32.3% Total Police/Sheriff & Per Capita Police/Sheriff & % of General Fund Expenditures on County Corrections Spending Corrections Spending Police/Sheriff and Corrections (Total Budget) (Total Budget) Contra Costa* 301,000,000 $275 20.0% St. Louis County $132,900,000 $133 31.8% *General Funds only, since total departmental funds are not provided. 2 INTRODUCTION Budgets are essentially financial documents that reflect the Local Spending spending priorities and types of investments an institution These trends in government spending are also prevalent deems to be sensible, practical, and effective. at the local level. The vast majority of municipalities are spending huge portions of their budgets on policing, For government, budgets are also moral documents. They while comparatively little goes to maintaining the are an articulation of what—and whom—our cities, counties, services, resources and infrastructures needed to keep states, and country deem worthy of investment. communities healthy and safe. In Oakland, California, for example, over 40 percent of the city’s general funds Over the last 30 years, the US has dramatically increased its go to policing. Human services, which include violence investment in policing and incarceration, while drastically prevention programs, services for youth, housing and cutting investments in basic infrastructure and slowing income support, and Head Start, receive less than 30 investment in social safety net programs.3 Elected officials cents to every dollar allocated in the overall budget for have stripped funds from mental health services, housing policing. Ultimately, due to shrinking state and local subsidies, youth programs, and food benefits programs, government budgets,11 more spending on policing and while pouring money into police forces, military grade incarceration means fewer resources for initiatives and weapons, high-tech surveillance, jails, and prisons. These institutions proven to benefit communities, whether investment choices have devastated Black and brown they be in education, health, environment, or basic low-income communities who are most affected by both infrastructure.12 criminalization and systemic social divestment.4 Impact of Criminalization & Moreover, the choice to invest in punitive systems instead Community Divestment of stabilizing and nourishing ones does not make our communities safer. Study after study shows that a living The massive divestment from communities of color13 wage, access to holistic health services and treatment, historically coincided with the US government’s “War educational opportunity, and stable housing are more on Drugs” and “tough on crime”